biblatex-chicago (12oct11)

git-svn-id: svn://tug.org/texlive/trunk@24274 c570f23f-e606-0410-a88d-b1316a301751

1 files changed, 19 insertions, 10 deletions

diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/biblatex-chicago.tex b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/biblatex-chicago.tex
index d3e7183dfbf..3f00e78acbf 100644
--- a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/biblatex-chicago.tex
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/biblatex-chicago.tex
@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@
   Style files for biblatex
 
 \vspace{.3\baselineskip}
-\sffamily\normalsize\bfseries David Fussner\qquad Version 0.9.8b (beta) \\
+\sffamily\normalsize\bfseries David Fussner\qquad Version 0.9.8c (beta) \\
 \href{mailto:djf027@googlemail.com}{djf027@googlemail.com}\\ \today
 
 \end{center} 
@@ -4716,7 +4716,7 @@ and \textsf{biblatex} will use the \textsf{origyear} as the
 citation, and also ensuring that the letters \texttt{a,b,c} are
 appended to disambiguate the two sources.  You no longer need anything
 in the \textsf{options} field at all, thanks to the way
-\cmd{DeclareLabelYear} works through the possibilities and finds a
+\cmd{DeclareLabelyear} works through the possibilities and finds a
 date to head the entry.  In this case, it works because we are using
 the \textsf{xref} mechanism to refer to the whole published collection
 (white:total), so a separate citation of that entry provides the
@@ -5557,12 +5557,12 @@ in the entry, in the order \textsf{date, eventdate, origdate,
   urldate}.  Only when it finds no year at all will it fall back on
 \cmd{bibstring\{nodate\}}.  You can eliminate some of these dates from
 the running, or change the search order, using the
-\cmd{DeclareLabelYear} command in your preamble, but please be aware
+\cmd{DeclareLabelyear} command in your preamble, but please be aware
 that I have hard-coded this order into the author-date style in order
 to cope with some tricky corners of the specification.  If you reorder
 these dates, and your references enter these tricky corners, the
 results might be surprising.  (Cf.\ section~4.5.2 in
-\textsf{biblatex.pdf} for the \cmd{DeclareLabelYear} command.)
+\textsf{biblatex.pdf} for the \cmd{DeclareLabelyear} command.)
 Second, the entry types in which this automatic provision is turned
 off are \textsf{inreference}, \textsf{misc}, and \textsf{reference},
 none of which may be expected in the standard case to have a date
@@ -5648,7 +5648,7 @@ publication data will also include the date of the modern reprint.
 contains another book by the same author, also a reprint edition:
 (Author 1896/1974).  How will these two works be ordered in the list
 of references?  By whatever appears in the \textsf{date} field, which
-appears first in the default definition of \cmd{DeclareLabelYear}, and
+appears first in the default definition of \cmd{DeclareLabelyear}, and
 which in this case will be wrong, because the entries should always be
 ordered by the \emph{first} date to appear there, in this case the
 contents of \textsf{origdate}.  In this example, the solution can be
@@ -5710,7 +5710,7 @@ in section~\ref{sec:types:authdate} for the details.)  If such an
 entry, as may well occur, contains only an \textsf{origdate}, as can
 also be the case in the \textsf{letter} entries I mentioned in the
 previous paragraph, \textsf{Biber} and the default
-\cmd{DeclareLabelYear} definition now make it possible to do without a
+\cmd{DeclareLabelyear} definition now make it possible to do without a
 \texttt{cmsdate} option, as \textsf{biblatex} will in such a case use
 the \textsf{origdate} to order the entries in a reference list, and
 will also append the alphabetical suffix if more than one entry by the
@@ -5954,7 +5954,7 @@ consistency for the \texttt{reprint} mechanism.  Cf.\
 \textsf{biblatex} field, added recently to the \textbf{music} entry
 type in case users need it to identify a particular recording session
 or concert.  See the documentation of that type above.  In the default
-configuration of \cmd{DeclareLabelYear}, an entry missing a
+configuration of \cmd{DeclareLabelyear}, an entry missing a
 \textsf{date} will use the \textsf{eventdate} to find a year for the
 citation and list of references, though the rest of the field would in
 such a case be ignored in any entry other than \textsf{music}.
@@ -6365,7 +6365,7 @@ the \textsf{origdate} in citations and at the head of entries in the
 list of references.  In entries which have \emph{only} an
 \textsf{origdate} --- usually \textsf{misc} with an
 \textsf{entrysubtype} --- \textsf{Biber} and the default
-\cmd{DeclareLabelYear} configuration now make it possible to do
+\cmd{DeclareLabelyear} configuration now make it possible to do
 without a \texttt{cmsdate} option, as the \textsf{origdate} will
 automatically appear where and as it should.  In entries with both
 dates you have a choice of which appears where.  In some cases it may
@@ -6992,7 +6992,7 @@ field, it identifies exactly when you accessed a given url.  This
 field would contain the whole date, in \textsc{iso}8601 format
 (evanston:library, grove:sibelius, hlatky:hrt, osborne:poison,
 sirosh:visualcortex, wikiped:bibtex).  In the default setting of
-\cmd{DeclareLabelYear}, any entry without a \textsf{date},
+\cmd{DeclareLabelyear}, any entry without a \textsf{date},
 \textsf{eventdate}, or \textsf{origdate} will now use the
 \textsf{urldate} to find a year for citations and the list of
 references (grove:sibelius, wikiped:bibtex).  Please note that the
@@ -8284,7 +8284,16 @@ thought I should warn you in advance.
 \section{Revision History}
 \label{sec:history}
 
-\textbf{0.9.8b: Released \today}
+\textbf{0.9.8c: Released \today}
+\begin{itemize}
+\item Emil Salim pointed out some rather basic errors in the
+  presentation of \textsf{inproceedings} and \textsf{proceedings}
+  entries, errors that have been present from the first release of the
+  style(s).  These should now, belatedly, have been put right.
+\item Minor improvements to coding and documentation.
+\end{itemize}
+
+\textbf{0.9.8b: Released September 29, 2011}
 \begin{itemize}
 \item Bad Dates: Christian Boesch alerted me to some date-formatting
   errors produced when using the styles with the \texttt{german}